BRICS New Delhi Declaration Backs India's UNSC Bid, Hits Terror

BRICS Declaration backs India's UNSC aspirations, condemns J-K terror attack; voices concern over unilateral tariffs

By Sahil Pandey, New Delhi, September 12

The declaration, adopted at the 18th BRICS Summit in New Delhi, said China and Russia, as permanent members of the UN Security Council, reiterated their support for the aspirations of Brazil and India to play a greater role in the UN, including its Security Council.

The BRICS leaders also reaffirmed their commitment to reforming the UN Security Council to make it more democratic, representative, effective and efficient, with greater representation for developing countries.

On terrorism, the grouping condemned "in the strongest terms" the terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir on April 22, 2025, in which 26 people were killed and several others injured.

The declaration reaffirmed BRICS' commitment to combating terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, including the cross-border movement of terrorists, terrorism financing and safe havens. It also called for zero tolerance for terrorism and rejected double standards in countering the menace.

The BRICS countries further called for the expeditious finalisation and adoption of the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism under the UN framework and urged concerted action against all UN-designated terrorists and terrorist entities.

On the economic front, the declaration voiced serious concern over the rise of unilateral tariff and non-tariff measures, saying such measures distort trade, threaten global supply chains and create uncertainty for international economic activity.

The grouping reaffirmed its support for reform of the World Trade Organisation and called for an open, equitable, transparent, fair, inclusive and rules-based multilateral trading system. It also advocated the immediate restoration of a fully functioning two-tier binding WTO dispute settlement mechanism.

The declaration also condemned unilateral economic and secondary sanctions that it said were contrary to international law, arguing that such measures have adverse implications for development, health and food security.

— ANI